We read in Holy Scripture “But if any harm follows, then you must take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (Exodus 21: 23-24). Many people thus interpret this passage as basically indicating that whatever wrong is so done to us, that we are fairly entitled to therefore mete out the same sort of punishment to those that assailed us or our family, in return. In other words, this scriptural passage is preaching righteous vengeance, which, unfortunately, appears to be still believed wholeheartedly as our just thing to do, or at least, to have the option of so doing, when we have been wronged by the other.
Perhaps though, our interpretation of this passage seems to be missing that there may well be nuances to our most common reading of an “eye for an eye”. Indeed, we have to take into serious account, that when we look at how justice has been historically enacted against those that are the richest, the most powerful, and the best connected, this strongly does indicate that the rich are quite frequently treated significantly differently and thus better than practically anyone else, in every aspect of how justice is enforced. For those that are well connected, their treatment when so accused of a noxious crime, seems to be, more times than not, diametrically different from what the average citizen must endure, and certainly far removed from what the poor and undefended, must so deal with.
So then, taking into account, that the rich and well placed are the very people that write the rules, interpret those same rules, and effect justice through those rules, we do so find, that those that are the most powerful, are able then to frequently use the law as a cudgel against those that they do not like, or find annoying, or desire to intimidate, or to hurt, but when it comes time for them to serve the same sort of punishment for the same kinds of crime, somehow that law doesn’t apply with nearly the same degree of severity to their own self.
Indeed, then, when we take a relook at an “eye for an eye” it would be better to understand it as being the last and best defense for those that have little or no voice, that when they thus unduly suffer from an injustice so imposed upon them, that those that have inflicted that suffering should themselves suffer an “eye for an eye” and therefore that justice as enacted under these conditions, would thus be no respecter of persons, at all; but would instead serve out that justice in a way and manner that those that have committed the crime, would endure the appropriate justice so previously determined to be legislated for that crime.
So, in short, those that are rich and powerful, that thus misuse and abuse their powers, against the people, would, in a world of justice which reflects this scripture, would duly have imposed upon them, the same measure that they have supported and implemented during their tenure. This then signifies, that an “eye for an eye” most definitely, as so interpreted through this new perspective, has good purpose.